Newspaper reported too much

Dear Editor,

I was pleasantly surprised to find the Observer in our mailbox the first week after we moved to Chesterfield County. At first appraisal by this award-winning community reporter and degreed newspaper journalist, it appeared a well-rounded, solidly written community news source.

Imagine my disappointment at your Apr. 11 banner front page story on former Midlothian Supervisor Ed Barber. Not being from Chesterfield County and knowing nothing of this story (at first) except what was in your newspaper that week, I read through the article with a gaping mouth. My professors in college would have failed a reporter who identified a sexual assault victim. My old publisher…well, he would have fired that reporter. Make no mistake, the only thing you didn't do was print her name - anyone who knows this family now knows who this young woman is and some rather unpleasant details about her life that she may have preferred to keep private. I have covered enough sexual assault cases to know how your story should have been written to protect the victim's identity - and you didn't do that.

I decided to do a little research, and I found that the Observer has consistently over-reported the identity of Barber's teenaged victim throughout the coverage of this case. In a balanced story focused on delivering facts to the reader, the girl's relationship to Barber, her parents' names, and where she goes to school and lives should have never been included. Just because you can access the information doesn't always mean you need to print it.

I have seen in past issues that the Observer, while shying away from commentary pieces, likes to comment on the actions of other media outlets in the Richmond area. During my search, I found no other such outlet which reported the Barber story in an improper form. Everywhere else, the victim was simply referred to as "Barber's teenaged victim" or "a 16-year-old girl."

Up until this story was published, I was really quite a fan of your publication.

I learned through years of experience that in journalism, your reputation is your most valuable asset. Your newspaper cannot undo what has been done to this young woman through your coverage of this story. But you can offer her an apology and make a concerted effort to not repeat the error.

LynDee Walker

Woodlake

Other media have reported that the victim is Barber's 16-year-old stepdaughter, and we have reported that she lives and attends school outside of the county. The story began as a result of a press release that the victim's attorney, J. Michael Sharman, sent this newspaper and other media, seeking news coverage of the lawsuit filed by the victim and her advisors. We sent the Apr. 11 issue to Mr. Sharman, and in an e-mail, he thanked the Chesterfield Observer for our news coverage. Neither Mr. Sharman nor the other two attorneys handling the case for the victim have indicated any dissatisfaction with our reporting. In fact, Mr. Sharman, who writes a newspaper column for a daily newspaper, has subsequently sent us two additional press releases to encourage the Chesterfield Observer to write more. To date, we have not. Editor